On 17/07/16 12:48, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Please, if you want to contribute to comprehending this new UK act, you will need to slow it waaay down, because you are writing conclusions, assumptions, with minimal quotes from the act, and making assertions based on these foundation things, and these foundation things are contradictory, and your conclusions are contradictory. Perhaps it's the British way, or perhaps the intention behind the passing of this Act is so nefarious, that the only way they could pass it was to be as obtuse, opaque and contradictory as it is, so that, ultimately, they (the parliament and those behind it - "the Lords spiritual and the Lords temporal") can wreak their mischief on the 'unsuspecting' people.
Being kind, you might say they put a good face on it. Being more realistic, they try and mostly succeed in slipping it through with the nastier parts unnoticed. That's what they did with RIPA, the previous act. Oh, and afaict there are no contradictions anywhere in what I have said.
Peter, if your intention be genuinely "pro" the people and "pro" human rights or at least "pro" understanding/comprehending, my assessment is that so far, you are diving into the trap this Act sets and intends for you - i.e. that you be "unsuspecting" of evil intentions behind it, trusting in the government, trusting in those who drafted it, trusting in your "Lords temporal" -
If you think I trust any of them, you are sadly mistaken. The Lords however are slightly better than the Home Office, who write the bills and tell their patsies in the Lords and Commons what to say the bills mean - which is frequently quite different to what they actually mean. However I am expert - repeat expert - in reading the actual damn Bills, and working out what they actually say. Better than the members of the Lords or Commons, better than the politicians who tell the Home Office cunts what to put in the Bills, better than the DPPs who apply them - most of whom don't read the actual Bills, just summaries, because the Bills are so complicated - and I am approaching as good as the people who write the damn things. If I don't go through all the details here it's just because the bills are so obscure and complex it would take megabytes and days of arguments. Then you would have to know the general legal framework behind the wording of a Bill, and the general legal framework of the UK, before knowing what it meant. And even then you might occasionally be surprised by a decision, some Judges just make stuff up as they go along, and not everything which should be appealed is. But you are welcome to read it yourself, it is available at: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2016-2017/0040/17040.pdf Enjoy! -- Peter F
